Seangio vs. Reyes

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 508 13/09/2018, 12*40 PM
VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 177

Seangio vs. Reyes
*
G.R. Nos. 140371–72. November 27, 2006.
DY YIENG SEANGIO, BARBARA D. SEANGIO and

VIRGINIA D. SEANGIO, petitioners, vs. HON. AMOR A.
REYES, in her capacity as Presiding Judge, Regional Trial
Court, National Capital Judicial Region, Branch 21,
Manila, ALFREDO D. SEANGIO, ALBERTO D.
SEANGIO, ELISA D. SEANGIO-SANTOS, VICTOR D.
SEANGIO, ALFONSO D. SEANGIO, SHIRLEY D.
SEANGIO-LIM, BETTY D. SEANGIO-OBAS and JAMES
D. SEANGIO, respondents.
Succession; Wills; Disinheritance; Maltreatment; For

disinheritance to be valid, Article 916 of the Civil Code requires that
the same must be effected through a will wherein the legal cause
therefor shall be specified; Maltreatment of a parent by a child
presents a sufficient cause for the disinheritance of the latter.·The
document, entitled Kasulatan ng Pag-Aalis ng Mana, unmistakably
showed SegundoÊs intention of excluding his eldest son, Alfredo, as
an heir to his estate for the reasons that he cited therein. In effect,
Alfredo was disinherited by Segundo. For disinheritance to be valid,
Article 916 of the Civil Code requires that the same must be
effected through a will wherein the legal cause therefor shall be
specified. With regard to the reasons for the disinheritance that
were stated by Segundo in his document, the Court believes that
the incidents, taken as a whole, can be considered a form of
maltreatment of Segundo by his son, Alfredo, and that the matter
presents a sufficient cause for the disinheritance of a child or
descendant under Article 919 of the Civil Code.
Same; Same; Same; Holographic Wills; A holographic will must

be entirely written, dated, and signed by the hand of the testator
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165d139a2b16944fa4f003600fb002c009e/p/AQG216/?username=Guest Page 1 of 16
himself·it is subject to no other form, and may be made in or out of

the Philippines, and need not be witnessed.·A holographic will, as
provided under Article 810 of the Civil Code, must be entirely
written, dated, and signed by the hand of the testator himself. It is
subject to no other form, and may be made in or out of the
Philippines, and need not be witnessed. SegundoÊs document,
although it may
_______________
* SECOND DIVISION.
178
178 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Seangio vs. Reyes
initially come across as a mere disinheritance instrument, conforms

to the formalities of a holographic will prescribed by law. It is
written, dated and signed by the hand of Segundo himself. An
intent to dispose mortis causa can be clearly deduced from the
terms of the instrument, and while it does not make an affirmative
disposition of the latterÊs property, the disinheritance of Alfredo,
nonetheless, is an act of disposition in itself. In other words, the
disinheritance results in the disposition of the property of the
testator Segundo in favor of those who would succeed in the absence
of Alfredo.
Same; Same; Same; Same; It is a fundamental principle that

the intent or the will of the testator, expressed in the form and within
the limits prescribed by law, must be recognized as the supreme law
in succession; Holographic wills, being usually prepared by one who
is not learned in the law, should be construed more liberally than the
ones drawn by an expert, taking into account the circumstances
surrounding the execution of the instrument and the intention of the
testator.·It is a fundamental principle that the intent or the will of
the testator, expressed in the form and within the limits prescribed
by law, must be recognized as the supreme law in succession. All
rules of construction are designed to ascertain and give effect to

that intention. It is only when the intention of the testator is
contrary to law, morals, or public policy that it cannot be given
effect. Holographic wills, therefore, being usually prepared by one
who is not learned in the law, as illustrated in the present case,
should be construed more liberally than the ones drawn by an
expert, taking into account the circumstances surrounding the
execution of the instrument and the intention of the testator. In this
regard, the Court is convinced that the document, even if captioned
as Kasulatan ng Pag-Aalis ng Mana, was intended by Segundo to be
his last testamentary act and was executed by him in accordance
with law in the form of a holographic will. Unless the will is
probated, the disinheritance cannot be given effect.
Same; Same; Same; Same; The law favors testacy over intestacy,
and testate proceedings for the settlement of the estate of the
decedent take precedence over intestate proceedings; The probate of a
will cannot be dispensed with.·Considering that the questioned
document is SegundoÊs holographic will, and that the law favors
testacy over intestacy, the probate of the will cannot be dispensed
with. Article 838 of the Civil Code provides that no will shall pass
179
VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 179
Seangio vs. Reyes
either real or personal property unless it is proved and allowed in

accordance with the Rules of Court. Thus, unless the will is
probated, the right of a person to dispose of his property may be
rendered nugatory. In view of the foregoing, the trial court,
therefore, should have allowed the holographic will to be probated.
It is settled that testate proceedings for the settlement of the estate
of the decedent take precedence over intestate proceedings for the
same purpose.
SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION in the Supreme Court.

Certiorari.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
Jose & Duremdes Law Offices for petitioners.

Punsalan, Lising & Punsalan for respondents.
AZCUNA, J.:
1
This is a petition for certiorari with application for the
issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction and/or
temporary restraining order seeking the nullification of the
orders, dated August 10, 1999 and October 14, 1999, of the
Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 21 (the RTC),
dismissing the petition for probate on the ground of
preterition, in the consolidated cases, docketed as SP. Proc.
No. 98–90870 and SP. Proc. No. 99–93396, and entitled, „In
the Matter of the Intestate Estate of Segundo C. Seangio v.
Alfredo D. Seangio, et al.‰ and „In the Matter of the Probate
of the Will of Segundo C. Seangio v. Dy Yieng Seangio,
Barbara D. Seangio and Virginia Seangio.‰
The facts of the cases are as follows:
On September 21, 1988, private respondents filed a
petition for the settlement of the intestate estate of the late
Segundo Seangio, docketed as Sp. Proc. No. 98–90870 of
the RTC, and praying for the appointment of private
respondent Elisa D. Seangio–Santos as special
administrator and guardian ad litem of petitioner Dy Yieng
Seangio.
_______________
1 Under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.
180

Seangio vs. Reyes
Petitioners Dy Yieng, Barbara and Virginia, all surnamed

Seangio, opposed the petition. They contended that: 1) Dy
Yieng is still very healthy and in full command of her
faculties; 2) the deceased Segundo executed a general
power of attorney in favor of Virginia giving her the power
to manage and exercise control and supervision over his
business in the Philippines; 3) Virginia is the most
competent and qualified to serve as the administrator of

the estate of Segundo because she is a certified public
accountant; and, 4) Segundo left a holographic will, dated
September 20, 1995, disinheriting one of the private
respondents, Alfredo Seangio, for cause. In view of the
purported holographic will, petitioners averred that in the
event the decedent is found to have left a will, the intestate
proceedings are to be automatically suspended and
replaced by the proceedings for the probate of the will.
On April 7, 1999, a petition for the probate of the
holographic will of Segundo, docketed as SP. Proc. No. 99–
93396, was filed by petitioners before the RTC. They
likewise reiterated that the probate proceedings should
take precedence over SP. Proc. No. 98–90870 because
testate proceedings take
2
precedence and enjoy priority over
intestate proceedings.
The document that petitioners refer to as SegundoÊs
holographic will is quoted, as follows:
Kasulatan sa pag-aalis ng mana

Tantunin ng sinuman
Ako si Segundo Seangio Filipino may asawa naninirahan sa 465-A

Flores St., Ermita, Manila at nagtatalay ng maiwanag na pagiisip
at disposisyon ay tahasan at hayagang inaalisan ko ng lahat at
anumang mana ang paganay kong anak na si Alfredo Seangio dahil
siya ay naging lapastangan sa akin at isan beses siya ng sasalita ng
masama harapan ko at mga kapatid niya na si Virginia Seangio
labis kong kinasama ng loob ko at sasabe rin ni Alfredo sa akin na
_______________
2 Records, p. 20.
181
VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 181

Seangio vs. Reyes
ako nasa ibabaw gayon gunit daratin ang araw na ako nasa ilalim
siya at siya nasa ibabaw.
Labis kong ikinasama ng loob ko ang gamit ni Alfredo ng akin
pagalan para makapagutang na kuarta siya at kanya asawa na si

Merna de los Reyes sa China Bangking Corporation na millon pesos
at hindi ng babayad at hindi ng babayad ito ay nagdulot sa aking
ng malaking kahihiya sa mga may-ari at stockholders ng China
Banking.
At ikinagalit ko pa rin ang pagkuha ni Alfredo at ng kanyang
asawa na mga custome[r] ng Travel Center of the Philippines na
pinagasiwaan ko at ng anak ko si Virginia.
Dito ako nagalit din kaya gayon ayoko na bilanin si Alfredo ng
anak ko at hayanan kong inaalisan ng lahat at anoman mana na si
Alfredo at si Alfredo Seangio ay hindi ko siya anak at hindi siya
makoha mana.
Nila[g]daan ko ngayon ika 20 ng Setyembre 1995 sa longsod ng
3
Manila sa harap ng tatlong saksi.
(signed)
Segundo Seangio
Nilagdaan sa harap namin
(signed)
Dy Yieng Seangio (signed)
Unang Saksi Ikalawang saksi
(signed)
Ikatlong saksi
On May 29, 1999, upon petitionersÊ motion, SP. Proc. No. 4

98–90870 and SP. Proc. No. 99–93396 were consolidated.
On July 1, 1999, private respondents5
moved for the
dismissal of the probate proceedings primarily on the
ground that the document purporting to be the holographic
will of Segundo does not contain any disposition of the
estate of the deceased and thus does not meet the definition
of a will under
_______________
3 Id., at p. 17.
4 Id., at p. 63.
5 Id., at p. 65.
182

Seangio vs. Reyes
Article 783 of the Civil Code. According to private

respondents, the will only shows an alleged act of
disinheritance by the decedent of his eldest son, Alfredo,
and nothing else; that all other compulsory heirs were not
named nor instituted as heir, devisee or legatee, hence,
there is preterition which would result to intestacy. Such
being the case, private respondents maintained that while
procedurally the court is called upon to rule only on the
extrinsic validity of the will, it is not barred from delving
into the intrinsic validity of the same, and ordering the
dismissal of the petition for probate when on the face of the
will it is clear that it contains no testamentary disposition
of the property of the decedent.
Petitioners filed their opposition to the motion to dismiss
contending that: 1) generally, the authority of the probate
court is limited only to a determination of the extrinsic
validity of the will; 2) private respondents question the
intrinsic and not the extrinsic validity of the will; 3)
disinheritance constitutes a disposition of the estate of a
decedent; and, 4) the rule on preterition does not apply
because SegundoÊs will does not constitute a universal heir6
or heirs to the exclusion of one or more compulsory heirs.
On August 10, 1999, the RTC issued its assailed order,
dismissing the petition for probate proceedings:
„A perusal of the document termed as „will‰ by

oppositors/petitioners Dy Yieng Seangio, et al., clearly shows that
there is preterition, as the only heirs mentioned thereat are Alfredo
and Virginia. [T]he other heirs being omitted, Article 854 of the
New Civil Code thus applies. However, insofar as the widow Dy
Yieng Seangio is concerned, Article 854 does not apply, she not
being a compulsory heir in the direct line.
As such, this Court is bound to dismiss this petition, for to do
otherwise would amount to an abuse of discretion. The Supreme
Court in the case of Acain v. Intermediate Appellate Court [155
SCRA 100 (1987)] has made its position clear: „for . . . respondents
to
_______________
6 Id., at p. 82.
183
VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 183

Seangio vs. Reyes
have tolerated the probate of the will and allowed the case to
progress when, on its face, the will appears to be intrinsically void .
. . would have been an exercise in futility. It would have meant a
waste of time, effort, expense, plus added futility. The trial court
could have denied its probate outright or could have passed upon the
intrinsic validity of the testamentary provisions before the extrinsic
validity of the will was resolved (italics supplied).
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Motion to Suspend
Proceedings is hereby DENIED for lack of merit. Special
Proceedings No. 99–93396 is hereby DISMISSED without
pronouncement as to costs.
7
SO ORDERED.‰
PetitionersÊ motion for reconsideration was denied by the

RTC in its order dated October 14, 1999.
Petitioners contend that:
THE RESPONDENT JUDGE ACTED IN EXCESS OF HER

JURISDICTION OR WITH GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION
AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION AND
DECIDED A QUESTION OF LAW NOT IN ACCORD WITH LAW
AND JURISPRUDENCE IN ISSUING THE QUESTIONED
ORDERS, DATED 10 AUGUST 1999 AND 14 OCTOBER 1999
(ATTACHMENTS „A‰ AND „B‰ HEREOF) CONSIDERING THAT:
THE RESPONDENT JUDGE, WITHOUT EVEN COMPLYING

WITH SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF RULE 76 OF THE RULES OF
COURT ON THE PROPER PROCEDURE FOR SETTING THE
CASE FOR INITIAL HEARING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
THE JURISDICTIONAL FACTS, DISMISSED THE TESTATE
CASE ON THE ALLEGED GROUND THAT THE TESTATORÊS
WILL IS VOID ALLEGEDLY BECAUSE OF THE EXISTENCE OF
PRETERITION, WHICH GOES INTO THE INTRINSIC VALIDITY
OF THE WILL, DESPITE THE FACT THAT IT IS A SETTLED
RULE THAT THE AUTHORITY OF PROBATE COURTS IS

LIMITED ONLY TO A DETERMINATION OF THE EXTRINSIC
VA
_______________
7 Id., at p. 96.
184

Seangio vs. Reyes
LIDITY OF THE WILL, I.E., THE DUE EXECUTION THEREOF,

THE TESTATORÊS TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY AND THE
COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUISITES OR SOLEMNITIES
PRESCRIBED BY LAW;
II
EVEN ASSUMING ARGUENDO THAT THE RESPONDENT

JUDGE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO RULE UPON THE
INTRINSIC VALIDITY OF THE WILL OF THE TESTATOR, IT IS
INDUBITABLE FROM THE FACE OF THE TESTATORÊS WILL
THAT NO PRETERITION EXISTS AND THAT THE WILL IS
BOTH INTRINSICALLY AND EXTRINSICALLY VALID; AND,
III
RESPONDENT JUDGE WAS DUTY BOUND TO SUSPEND

THE PROCEEDINGS IN THE INTESTATE CASE CONSIDERING
THAT IT IS A SETTLED RULE THAT TESTATE PROCEEDINGS
TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER INTESTATE PROCEEDINGS.
Petitioners argue, as follows:

First, respondent judge did not comply with Sections 3
and 4 of Rule 76 of the Rules of Court which respectively
mandate the court to: a) fix the time and place for proving
the will when all concerned may appear to contest the
allowance thereof, and cause notice of such time and place
to be published three weeks successively previous to the
appointed time in a newspaper of general circulation; and,
b) cause the mailing of said notice to the heirs, legatees and
devisees of the testator Segundo;

Second, the holographic will does not contain any
institution of an heir, but rather, as its title clearly states,
Kasulatan ng Pag-Aalis ng Mana, simply contains a
disinheritance of a compulsory heir. Thus, there is no
preterition in the decedentÊs will and the holographic will
on its face is not intrinsically void;
Third, the testator intended all his compulsory heirs,
petitioners and private respondents alike, with the sole
exception of Alfredo, to inherit his estate. None of the
compulsory heirs
185
VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 185

Seangio vs. Reyes
in the direct line of Segundo were preterited in the

holographic will since there was no institution of an heir;
Fourth, inasmuch as it clearly appears from the face of
the holographic will that it is both intrinsically and
extrinsically valid, respondent judge was mandated to
proceed with the hearing of the testate case; and,
Lastly, the continuation of the proceedings in the
intestate case will work injustice to petitioners, and will
render nugatory the disinheritance of Alfredo.
The purported holographic will of Segundo that was
presented by petitioners was dated, signed and written by
him in his own handwriting. Except on the ground of
preterition, private respondents did not raise any issue as
regards the authenticity of the document.
The document, entitled Kasulatan ng Pag-Aalis ng
Mana, unmistakably showed SegundoÊs intention of
excluding his eldest son, Alfredo, as an heir to his estate for
the reasons that he cited therein. In effect, Alfredo was
disinherited by Segundo.
For disinheritance to be valid, Article 916 of the Civil
Code requires that the same must be effected through a
will wherein the legal cause therefor shall be specified.
With regard to the reasons for the disinheritance that were
stated by Segundo in his document, the Court believes that
the incidents, taken as a whole, can be considered a form of
maltreatment of Segundo by his son, Alfredo, and that the

matter presents a sufficient cause for the disinheritance of
a child or descendant under Article 919 of the Civil Code:
Article 919. The following shall be sufficient causes for the

disinheritance of children and descendants, legitimate as well as
illegitimate:
(1) When a child or descendant has been found guilty of an

attempt against the life of the testator, his or her spouse,
descendants, or ascendants;
186

Seangio vs. Reyes
(2) When a child or descendant has accused the

testator of a crime for which the law prescribes
imprisonment for six years or more, if the
accusation has been found groundless;
(3) When a child or descendant has been convicted of
adultery or concubinage with the spouse of the
testator;
(4) When a child or descendant by fraud, violence,
intimidation, or undue influence causes the testator
to make a will or to change one already made;
(5) A refusal without justifiable cause to support the
parents or ascendant who disinherit such child or
descendant;
(6) Maltreatment of the 8testator by word or deed, by the
child or descendant;
(7) When a child or descendant leads a dishonorable or
disgraceful life;
(8) Conviction of a crime which carries with it the
penalty of civil interdiction.
Now, the critical issue to be determined is whether the

document executed by Segundo can be considered as a
holographic will.
A holographic will, as provided under Article 810 of the
Civil Code, must be entirely written, dated, and signed by

the hand of the testator himself. It is subject to no other
form, and may be made in or out of the Philippines, and
need not be witnessed.
SegundoÊs document, although it may initially come
across as a mere disinheritance instrument, conforms to
the formalities of a holographic will prescribed by law. It is
written, dated and signed by the hand
9
of Segundo himself.
An intent to dispose mortis causa can be clearly deduced
from the terms of the instrument, and while it does not
make an af-
_______________
8 Emphasis supplied.
9 Article 783 of the Civil Code states: „A will is an act whereby a
person is permitted, with the formalities prescribed by law, to control to a
certain degree the disposition of his estate, to take effect after his death.‰
187
VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 187

Seangio vs. Reyes
firmative disposition of the latterÊs property, the

disinheritance of Alfredo, nonetheless, is an act of
disposition in itself. In other words, the disinheritance
results in the disposition of the property of the testator
Segundo in10 favor of those who would succeed in the absence
of Alfredo.
Moreover, it is a fundamental principle that the intent
or the will of the testator, expressed in the form and within
the limits prescribed by law, must be recognized as the
supreme law in succession. All rules of construction are
designed to ascertain and give effect to that intention. It is
only when the intention of the testator is contrary 11 to law,
morals, or public policy that it cannot be given effect.
Holographic wills, therefore, being usually prepared by
one who is not learned in the law, as illustrated in the
present case, should be construed more liberally than the
ones drawn by an expert, taking into account the
circumstances surrounding the execution of the instrument
12
and the intention of the testator. In this regard, the Court
is convinced that the document, even if captioned as
Kasulatan ng Pag-Aalis ng Mana, was intended by
Segundo to be his last testamentary act and was executed
by him in accordance with law in 13
the form of a holographic
will. Unless the will is probated, the
_______________
10 Tolentino, Arturo M., „Commentaries and Jurisprudence on the Civil

Code of the Philippines,‰ Volume III, p. 30.
11 Id., at p. 38.
12 Id., at pp. 37–39.
13 In a petition to admit a holographic will to probate, the only issues
to be resolved are: 1) whether the instrument submitted is, indeed, the
decedentÊs last will and testament; 2) whether said will was executed in
accordance with the formalities prescribed by law; 3) whether the
decedent had the necessary testamentary capacity at the time the will
was executed; and, 4) whether the execution of the will and its signing
were the voluntary acts of the decedents. As a general rule, courts in
probate proceedings are limited to pass only upon the extrinsic validity of
the will sought to be probated. However, in exceptional circumstances,
courts are not powerless to do
188

Seangio vs. Reyes
14
disinheritance cannot be given effect. 15
With regard to the issue on preterition, the Court
believes that the compulsory heirs in the direct line were
not preterited in the will. It was, in the CourtÊs opinion,
SegundoÊs last expression to bequeath his estate to all his
compulsory heirs, with the sole exception
16
of Alfredo. Also,
Segundo did not institute an heir to the exclusion of his
other compulsory heirs. The mere mention of the name of
one of the petitioners, Virginia, in the document did not
operate to institute her as the universal heir. Her name
was included plainly as a witness to the altercation
between Segundo and his son, Alfredo.
Considering that the questioned document is SegundoÊs

holographic will, and that the law favors testacy over
intestacy, the probate of the will cannot be dispensed with.
Article 838 of the Civil Code provides that no will shall
pass either real or personal property unless it is proved and
allowed in
_______________
what the situation constrains them to do, and pass upon certain
provisions of the will (Ajero v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 106720,
September 15, 1994, 236 SCRA 488).
14 Supra note 10.
15 Article 854 of the Civil Code states: „The preterition or omission of
one, some, or all of the compulsory heirs in the direct line, whether living
at the time of the execution of the will or born after the death of the
testator, shall annul the institution of heir; but the devisees and legacies
shall be valid insofar as they are not inofficious.
If the omitted compulsory heirs should die before the testator, the
institution shall be effectual, without prejudice to the right of
representation.‰
16 Article 841 of the Civil Code states: „A will is valid even though it
should not contain an institution of an heir, or such institution should
not comprise the entire estate, and even though the person so instituted
should not accept the inheritance or should be incapacitated to succeed.
In such cases the testamentary dispositions made in accordance with
law shall be complied with and the remainder of the estate shall pass to
the legal heirs.‰
189
VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 189

Seangio vs. Reyes
accordance with the Rules of Court. Thus, unless the will is

probated, the right of a person
17
to dispose of his property
may be rendered nugatory.
In view of the foregoing, the trial court, therefore, should
have allowed the holographic will to be probated. It is
settled that testate proceedings for the settlement of the
estate of the decedent take precedence
18
over intestate
proceedings for the same purpose.
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Orders of

the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 21, dated
August 10, 1999 and October 14, 1999, are set aside.
Respondent judge is directed to reinstate and hear SP Proc.
No. 99–93396 for the allowance of the holographic will of
Segundo Seangio. The intestate case or SP. Proc. No. 98–
90870 is hereby suspended until the termination of the
aforesaid testate proceedings.
No costs.
SO ORDERED.
Puno (Chairperson), Sandoval-Gutierrez, Corona

and Garcia, JJ., concur.
Petition granted.
Notes.·The probate of a will is conclusive as to its due

execution and extrinsic validity and settles only the
question of whether the testator, being of sound mind,
freely executed it in accordance with the formalities
prescribed by law·questions as to intrinsic validity may
still be raised even after the will has been authenticated.
(Estate of Hilario M. Ruiz vs. Court of Appeals, 252 SCRA
541 [1996])
_______________
17 Maninang v. Court of Appeals, No. L-57848, June 19, 1982, 114

SCRA 478.
18 Cuenco v. Court of Appeals, No. L-24742, October 26, 1973, 53 SCRA
360.
190

Cosme, Jr. vs. People
A probate court or one in charge of proceedings whether

testate or intestate cannot adjudicate or determine title to
properties claimed to be a part of the estate and which are
claimed to belong to outside parties. (Sanchez vs. Court of
Appeals, 279 SCRA 647 [1997])
··o0o··
© Copyright 2018 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.

Seangio vs. Reyes

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Seangio vs. Reyes

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 508 13/09/2018, 12*40 PM

VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 177

DY YIENG SEANGIO, BARBARA D. SEANGIO and

Succession; Wills; Disinheritance; Maltreatment; For

Same; Same; Same; Holographic Wills; A holographic will must

himself·it is subject to no other form, and may be made in or out of

178 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Seangio vs. Reyes

initially come across as a mere disinheritance instrument, conforms

Same; Same; Same; Same; It is a fundamental principle that

rules of construction are designed to ascertain and give effect to

VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 179

Seangio vs. Reyes

either real or personal property unless it is proved and allowed in

SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION in the Supreme Court.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.

Jose & Duremdes Law Offices for petitioners.

1 Under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.

180 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Petitioners Dy Yieng, Barbara and Virginia, all surnamed

competent and qualified to serve as the administrator of

Kasulatan sa pag-aalis ng mana

Ako si Segundo Seangio Filipino may asawa naninirahan sa 465-A

VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 181

pagalan para makapagutang na kuarta siya at kanya asawa na si

On May 29, 1999, upon petitionersÊ motion, SP. Proc. No. 4

182 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Article 783 of the Civil Code. According to private

„A perusal of the document termed as „will‰ by

VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 183

PetitionersÊ motion for reconsideration was denied by the

THE RESPONDENT JUDGE ACTED IN EXCESS OF HER

THE RESPONDENT JUDGE, WITHOUT EVEN COMPLYING

RULE THAT THE AUTHORITY OF PROBATE COURTS IS

184 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

LIDITY OF THE WILL, I.E., THE DUE EXECUTION THEREOF,

EVEN ASSUMING ARGUENDO THAT THE RESPONDENT

RESPONDENT JUDGE WAS DUTY BOUND TO SUSPEND

Petitioners argue, as follows:

devisees of the testator Segundo;

VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 185

in the direct line of Segundo were preterited in the

maltreatment of Segundo by his son, Alfredo, and that the

Article 919. The following shall be sufficient causes for the

(1) When a child or descendant has been found guilty of an

186 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

(2) When a child or descendant has accused the

Now, the critical issue to be determined is whether the

Civil Code, must be entirely written, dated, and signed by

VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 187

firmative disposition of the latterÊs property, the

10 Tolentino, Arturo M., „Commentaries and Jurisprudence on the Civil

188 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Considering that the questioned document is SegundoÊs

VOL. 508, NOVEMBER 27, 2006 189

accordance with the Rules of Court. Thus, unless the will is

WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Orders of

Puno (Chairperson), Sandoval-Gutierrez, Corona

Notes.·The probate of a will is conclusive as to its due

17 Maninang v. Court of Appeals, No. L-57848, June 19, 1982, 114

190 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

A probate court or one in charge of proceedings whether

© Copyright 2018 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi